Production by the masses, not mass production... Compost and small farms. AND, smiling. Thank you.:)

great, another weatherman. people have been saying exactly this for thirty years, more ... but nothing changes ... what is different now?

only that maybe enough fraud, deception, greed has happened that just possibly a few major institutions and a couple of countries might collapse, but i am not holding my breath.

best to ignore the system, ignore the status quo, and directly make something useful, but there aren't many consulting dollars in that.

Wow, a mention of Muhammad Yunus and all this extra great stuff too boot.

Organize the world's hunger.
Organize the world’s energy.
Organize the world’s thirst.
Organize the world's health.
Organize the world's freedom.
Organize the world's finance.
Organize the world's education.

That's not an exhaustive list - it's just a beginning. What's important is the logic behind it. Let's make that as razor-sharp as possible.

Some thoughts. Heh.

Not enough traditional companies or startups give much if any thought to 3.5 billion BOP people on the planet. How can Twitter be used to end poverty. Can SMS/text messaging be used for clean water or developing world education? The technology people are often heads down in designing and exacution for some exit path, the development industry are usually not that technically savvy, the governments are stuck in process, policy and paperwork, and people living in abject poverty are working hard day-to-day to try to get enough food. And of course, no one person, group or organization has the one size fits all answer that works everywhere either.

We've got to make it simple.

We've got to try many thing, many times, fail a lot, and learn loads.

Quick feedback loops.

Focus on Emerging results over planned outcomes.

Radical Transparency.

Adaptive Blueprinting

Ok, just getting to the point of pure rambling and smacking the keyboard now. Loved the post. Looking forward to more like it.

Be well.

I remain floored by your willingness to share this information openly, rather than charge big bucks for it in private consulting sessions. Of course, in sharing it, you're actually modeling the behaviors you recommend. And firms that don't understand what you're saying won't listen anyway.

I really appreciated this particular post because it's got some pointers to real actions we can promote as individuals within our firms, or so we can go out on our own to create new firms.

more than answers, I'm throwing in more questions:

what happens when the rest of humanity gets free access to education ?

what happens when you are able to 3d-print machine pieces ?

the long tail of the means of production ?

what is the critical mass necessary, or what are the necessary primary conditions for this to happen ?

Since you have a pretty exhaustive list of some monumental challenges, I will try and be focused in the comments.

Let's talk about organizing the world's hunger.

We figured out how to organize our hunger in the west 150 years ago, yet that knowledge still has not been transferred to the developing world.

I am, of course, talking about the Chicago Board of Trade (a futures market for durable agricultural produce). This had radical effects on minimizing hunger, improving farmer's welfare, and stabilizing prices.

In many parts of the developing world, even with low cost computers, cell phones, internet access, and barcodes, this kind of market does not exist. Often, when it does, it is primarily used by outsiders to divide up their spoils and sell them to the highest overseas bidder, not reduce famine. The CBOT was world-changing with pens and paper & high transaction costs. Imagine what we could do today...

Clearly, some reader of this blog is capable of building a scalable system for agricultural trading. Something that is accessible to farmers, brokers, warehouses, investors, and buyers. If that sounds like something you are capable of building then there is a moral imperative to get started. Take a look at what ECEX is doing in Ethiopia for an idea of how to start. If you need some help, I'm not too hard to reach.

Traditional large firms gain advantage by scaling only upward so few can compete. The examples of Google and the Grameen Bank have the ability to scale downward in some respects as well as upward in others.

Google scales upward by indexing billions of pages and downward in finding a single important page during a search. The Adwords program scales downward in allowing a web site with one page to become an advertising host and allows very small specialized advertisers to purchase a small quantity of advertisements or a large advertiser to purchase huge quantities.

The Grameen bank allows the smallest enterprise to obtain a loan but scales upward by servicing millions of customers.

Wikipedia scales downward by allowing a user to perform an action as minor as a spelling correction and scales upward by having millions of entries.

The challenges you laid out for organizing hunger, energy, thirst, health, freedom, finance and education need to be considered in the same way. How can the same system satisfy the hunger of one individual as well as the hunger of billions? How can it scale from a producer with 10 pounds of extra vegetables up to an agribusiness with trainloads of produce?

markets --> buy and sell stuff - information exchange
networks --> basic communication - reachability - addressability
communities --> trust - topical - common goal(?)

"markets, networks, and communities can organize economic activities radically more efficiently than firms" - I believe that is true - but it is also true that they fail sometimes. We should catalogue the failure modes of them - so that we know how to support them at the right point.

So here is one idea for anthropology research - catalogue failures in Open Source projects.

"markets, networks, and communities can organize economic activities radically more efficiently than firms" - I believe this is true - but it is also true that thei fail sometimes. We need to catalogue the failure modes of them so that we know how to support them at the right point.

And here is an anthropology research project - catalogue failures in Open Source projects.

nice one Umair;) Mirrors some points in this foresighted bombastically titled manifesto of Bauwens. http://tinyurl.com/6ebr5d
j

Organize the world's freedom.

This struck a note with me. As free and open source software (FOSS) advocate, it sounds very much like FOSS is organizing freedom in the world of software.

Today Firefox 3 is released. As of writing this comment it has already passed 5 million downloads. Could it have done this if it's not done in a free/libre way?

http://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/edenh/media/nature-comment-may08

Organize the worlds need for energy:
the question is how to set the right incentives for markets. Ottmar Edenhofer, climate economist in Potsdam, who did the fundamental research of the Stern-report, is working on this question. See his comments and website:

http://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/edenh

http://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/edenh/media/nature-comment-may08

Sorry to hear your mom is ill and I hope she is recovery under your care.

You should shoot a video of this talk for Seesmic and get it out there. You have stimulated a lot of thinking...

Mine leans towards two questions:

Where are the revolutionaries reorganizing the world's energy? Who will tip the new green economy?

I agree minor league investments in clean tech won't do it. While it is a start, we need multiple solutions, including industrial scale development and distributed renewable alternatives. And we can't follow any one technology down the rabbit hole or to Abilene or whatever.

Looking forward to being part of that revolution and trying to figure out how to organize it.

Thanks for the inspiration.

Organize? Someone's been drinking the Google Juice.

The invisible hand is crippled - but not by capitalism - but by businesses who actually do exactly the opposite of capitalism.

Will organizing make thing better? I'm not sure but I do agree with some of Mark's points about the quick feedback loop.

However, that feedback loop is precisely what you are referring to by creative destruction.

Two problems:
a) creative destruction doesn't/shouldn't kill someone in the process. If there's a better process, then all involved should want to get involved. If they want to be left behind, don't blame creative destruction - blame themselves.

b) The other problem is as long as you allow those who want to "lean" on others to get their point across (and those others LET THEM), then any movement forward is pushed back. Those that lean are typically the ones found in point a).

It's the human condition that must "change" - not just to accept change but to welcome and embrace it. ESPECIALLY in terms of business.

wow, amazing comments. really - great stuff.

andrew,

"...The invisible hand is crippled - but not by capitalism - but by businesses who actually do exactly the opposite of capitalism."

exactly the problem: that's not a mistake. it's actually the essence of what orthodox "capitalism" was *meant* to be.

daniel,

that's a nice link - recommended reading for others.

zbigniew,

failure modes for markets, networks, communities - great idea. i will do an open thread on this soon.

gregory,

you're in bangalore, right? and you're arguing nothing's changed in the last 30 years...?!

john b,

massively perceptive point about scale. we'll discuss in the context of etsy soon.

john p,

thanks - i'm very gratified that you see the deeper ideal there.

nicholas,

yes, there is a "moral imperative" to make a CBOT elsewhere - (though i don't think the CBOT/etc solve nearly as many problems as you outline). but there's also a strategic imperative.

everyone,

please don't miss the larger point. i'm not asking businesses to become charities. rather, i think today's challenges dictate that these arenas are where tomorrow's fortunes will be made.

thx to everyone for the comments - i really enjoyed reading them.

Umair -

Whenever I read your posts - most recently, the Challenge to Silicon Valley, and now this one - I'm nodding. However, getting started down this path still seems extremely difficult to me.

I'm a Canadian, I've lived in America for several years, but I don't have a lot of exposure to other countries and cultures. While it was relatively easy to raise venture capital for my mobile-advertising-related start-up, which markets to people with a good deal of disposable income, I can't imagine raising money to tackle the problems you're suggesting - in part because of the investment climate (or perhaps just how I perceive the investment climate), in part because of my own lack of experience. Nor can I imagine bootstrapping a company tackling these issues with my somewhat limited means.

Right now, when I read posts like yours, I think 'man, I hope my current business (which, don't get me wrong, I love) goes well, so in a few years I can devote a dedicated chunk of time and some of my own capital to learning and eventually creating a business that's simultaneously profitable and solves some of society's more pressing, critical problems.' And then I go back to trying to grow my current business.

For me, it would be extremely useful to not just read about the opportunity - I'm convinced it's there - but to be put in touch with sources of capital or even just experienced mentors to discuss ideas and direct my own learning and exploration. Without a support network, it's all too easy to do what you know, and just start another consumer-oriented web startup. I'm posting in the comments instead of e-mailing privately because I suspect there's a lot of other people out there that feel the same way - if you were to put together a community of entrepreneurs, investors, and mentors, it'd be an extremely useful service.

Organize the world's organizations.

i.e.: redefine the management consulting and enteprise software industries to fuel change in large corporations that, despite all the hype, will remain around for quite some time and will be instrumental in solving many of the challeneges the planet face (infrastructure plays, energy generation and delivery, etc. will still need large cos.).

I'm gonna talk about that this afternoon at Supernova.

As always, sharp post Umair, and my thoughts are with you and your family.

- Julien

umair, i've been reading your work for 3+ years now, and this is one of the most insightful, well-written, and inspiring posts i've read. well done!

Umair,

I'm going to work with Swift Kick as an advisor... Met Kevin recently--total revolutionary. I'm sure you saw this, but wanted to bring it to your attention:

http://blog.swiftkickonline.com/2008/06/an-open-letter.html

Actually, Fred introduced me to Kevin because of the college angle of Path 101... We hit it off--very like-minded thinking on how schools needed to change the way they (or more accurately start to) create revolutionaries.

You should definitely chat with Kevin. Hope all is well.

Charlie

there is a huge difference between change and transformation

change happens constantly ... the weather, our bodies, cities, circumstances; it cannot be stopped

transformation is very very rare, and is most often avoided, if people have the choice!

change is horizontal, transformation is vertical

dna cannot be changed, it can only be transformed. in fact, it transforms itself.

systems, enterprises, are collections of people and processes ... unless you can transform people, you can talk your whole life about change, and only horizontal variation will happen

people resist transformation with all of their might, because it is exactly the equivalent of suicide. you have to demolish your self-identity.

the people least willing to change or are those most vested in the established systems of political and economic power. they basically have to die before transformation will occur.

it is pointless to advocate change, if you have no understanding of the transformation of character and consciousness.

umair's strategy is to argue that it is in the best interests of organizations, of the world, to change. fine, but that is just like saying to your own dna, be different. it is not possible, and it is not supposed to be. there is a higher game going on, one in which the ignorance of the world plays a very important role.

this game is all about creating individual transformation. the world is only a metaphor, and perfectly designed to do that.

right war, wrong battle

I sort of wonder if you are barking up the wrong tree emphasizing silicon valley and tech entrepreneurs so much. Maybe that doesn't need to transform so much as a new alternative needs to develop. Many (most?) corporations did not change. They met the challenges of their day and stayed stagnant. Silicon valley just grew up beside it. Now, silicon valley is stagnant at a different level. It's parallel. Corporations are to Silicon Valley as Silicon Valley is to ???. What goes into those question marks? It sounds like your revolution does. But expecting it from silicon valley is like expecting corporations to handle the revolution silicon valley caused would have been.

I think of this as the good enough problem. Most people use qwerty keyboards even though science proves everyone would gain productivity switching to dvorak. Most people in the US still use miles and feet instead of metric. Corporations largely didn't change because what they were doing was good enough. Silicon Valley won't change, because the way it's doing business is good enough. Once you get something to the point it's good enough, people are afraid to change it. I think you would have more luck finding people outside of silicon valley or putting your practice into actions yourself. You need disaffected outsiders to solve these problems not silicon valley in the same way that silicon valley needed disaffected outsiders and not corporations. Only, disaffected outsiders can't come from a place so established and entrenched.

You do such a good job with the shortcomings of silicon valley and the paucity of vision there, what makes you think Silicon Valley is the right target of your challenge? Trying to get people doing something good enough to do it better is one of the hardest things in the world. Maybe you are banging your head against a wall, and should try and find a door in a different place.

I agree with your manifesto (although I am sure there is more meaning there then I grasp, I'm working on medical stuff, not media stuff), except I don't understand why you think this revolution will be in silicon valley or it's associated culture. Silicon Valley had a revolution, now it's doing things good enough. The next revolution (which I feel will otherwise be eerily like you predict) won't happen in the same spot or cultural environment the last one is, not while everyone in that mode (which is the new conventional thinking) is fat from it.

If your ideas are right, you could be the next bill gates or warren buffet implementing them. Wouldn't that be better than consulting, and trying to give truth to people who are mostly too content to be bothered enough by your vision to improve to the level you know it could be done at? It must be frustrating to see so clearly how much better things can be, and not seeing them improve much.

"The revolution needs revolutionaries. Today’s investors, boardrooms and entrepreneurs are looking for value in all the wrong places."

You are looking for your revolutionaries in the wrong places. Remember, corporations were revolutionary at one point. If you want to be on the edge, what are you doing in the middle of the blade with the entrenched people in silicon valley?

@ brian king ... you ask good questions ... i assume silicon valley and allied industries is the group mr. haque wants to play with, be recognized by, places where the money is. to me he has seemed more interested in consulting than creating.

no one can argue with his ideas, they are universal principles, articulated by many for a long time. how things should be is different than making them be that way, which anyway happens by itself, as all revolutions are spontaneously generated.

a fun read, love his attitude, bemoan the lack of actual strategic content, but recognize that i have to go elsewhere to find actual change happening.

Gregory - Thanks for the reply, but I really don't mean this at all as critical as you sound. I actually disagree strongly with you. I don't think he cynically targets silicon valley to get consulting gigs at all. He doesn't seem like the type to not say what he actually thinks.

I think Umair has deep strategic content, so deep some people don't see it. Maybe it's just a level to meta for your tastes. I also don't think what he's saying has all been said before. I just think he has a subtle but fatal flaw in there about where his revolutionaries are going to coming from. What he's doing is like calculus, and you're complaining he's not doing algebra. I just think he should recognize his calculus isn't going to be of interest to people content with algebra and that he's wasting time (remember, time is a moral imperative with these problems) trying to find revolutionaries in places people are content with algebra.

He said to talk about this manifesto and his open challenge to silicon valley. I think his manifesto is spot on (although, I think it's more true for some problems then others), but his open challenge is addressed wrong. It should be addressed to outsiders to silicon valley. I really didn't mean to sound like I was calling him out for consulting or anything like that. Not at all. I'd imagine he's a great consultant, and I imagine that people would do really well to not only listen to what he says but act on it and take the time to hear what he's saying without preconceived notions.

Education article:

http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_3/keats/index.html

True that, Umair. I don't think there is anything special about information (except perhaps the speed at which it has been able to scale over the last decade) that has allowed Google to be such a lucrative business. Organizing the world's... is a big task, and there are huge incentives waiting for anyone who can accomplish any of your 7 goals.

Brian, I found your comments interesting but I think you are short-changing the Valley a bit. Silicon Valley is special not just because of its dense concentration of skilled engineers, but because of its ability to reinvent itself. Maybe that comes from its Haight Ashbury connections in its early days, maybe it comes from the plasticity of the great minds who work there, or maybe it comes from the constant need for guerrilla tactics to unseat the latest incumbent.

What I know is that it goes deeper than agglomeration economies, which can be created anywhere, and hints at the culture of the Valley. The revolutionaries are already there and waiting, they just don't know what revolution they're going to be a part of yet.

monetary policy is the fundamental problem in the world. there is no real revolution, and no real return to capitalism, until the monetary policy problem is solved.

solving this problem requires people learn about monetary policy and requires people have the courage and maturity to talk about it. it's a political topic, and most people don't talk about it because doing so would be "bad for business." lol. ironically criminal monetary policy is what is really bad for business -- but if you don't believe me watch what's going to happen to the US economy over the next four years.

hey brian,

thanks for the very insightful comments.

a couple of points.

1) i'm based in london, not the valley.

2) i'm not a consultant (anymore). i run a lab. we don't operate on a consulting model.

3) i certainly don't make any claim to exclusivity for revolution and silicon valley - in fact, most of the startups i think are awesome these days are outside the valley, like you point out.

the two posts are linked analytically this way. silicon valley is really the only authentic venture economy in the world. but today's revolutionaries are increasingly coming from outside the valley. so if venture guys aren't seeding revolutions at least as much or more than other places, there's a problem of misallocated capital in the venture economy (as venture numbers indicate).

thx again for the comments guys!!

umair, once again, a v interesting post.

in our, transparent (open), interconnected world "authentic value" will, i think, become more and more important. We all need to be more discerning in what value we create (could value creation really become commoditized ;)the irony). Openess and peering is one tool. As the world "opens" up, 'true' democratic institutions will force us to address these problems head on.

As we move away from industries which gave rise to material goods and services, blurring and converging to more experience led value - your list is the obvious starting point. To me, it reads like the base pyramid of maslow's hierachy of needs - a collective of global problems to survive. What will be further up the collective pyramid? What will the future industries converge into?

personal expression?
wealth health?
talent leverage?
environment?
physical health?
enlightenment?
relationships?
political freedom?
Travel?
Entertainment?

Umair,

hope your mother is on the mend...

My take on what you have said about Creative Destruction is that I think Joseph Schumpeter's concept was somewhat loose and metaphoric. The 'destruction' being basically symbolic of the evolution from previous paradigms that no longer hold currency. That destruction therefore perhaps need not have a directly linked capital cost. (although worthwhile change will have cost impacts everywhere, but this has to be less severe than the cost of broad systemic collapse)

What needs to be destroyed are 'ideas' and in particular the toxic idea of 'endless-growth'... Your reference to "the price of growth" resonated with me as a key issue. The simple fact is that idea of 'endless-growth' as espoused by western capitalism, and now being mimicked by the mega developing nations (China & India) charts a trajectory for global collapse.

The Earth is a closed system... and the system is breaking all around because of the endless-growth agenda. One of the clearest manifestations that people seem to blindly adhere to is the constant growth expectations built into Wall Street. i.e. When a leading company dips from its growth estimates, the stock tanks. It doesn't take a genius to work out that this inevitably drives either fraudulent reporting or the take-no-prisoners logic that inspired Companies like Texaco (now Chevron) to use practices in Ecuador up until 1992 that were outlawed in Texas in 1939.

("During its operation in Ecuador Amazon until 1992, Texaco spilled 17 million gallons [around 64 mln litres] of oil from its pipeline and dumped 18 billion (!) gallons [around 68 bln litres] of toxic waste directly into the rainforest, and thus contaminating 1,700 square miles [around 442,000 ha] of pristine Ecuador rainforest with extremely dangerous chemicals." -http://tinyurl.com/3uodpd)

The promise of the internet, is that the web-corpus might be able to self-mobilize to force the destruction of this poisonous 'endless-growth' logic of the Twentieth Century, and move toward ideas that are compatible with the closed-system planet we all live on.

Good stuff, Umair. You continue to crank out very inspiring work.

A while back, we (at Meetup) were talking about "Organizing the World's People" -- but it didn't feel right. Now we say we want to see "The World's People, Self-Organized" -- and that feels more right.

Decentralization is about providing the platforms & inspiration for self-organization, not centralized organization.

What if, in your essay, you replaced "Organize the World's X" with enabling "The World's X, Self-Organized". Where/how/when/why would that make sense?

"Al Qaeda's Growing Online Offensive":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/23/AR2008062302135.html

This article is flat-out brilliant, I hope it's developed into a book. Recommended for everyone here.

Umair, have you looked into analyzing The Base? It's such a powerful case study...

It could be an even more useful than your riffs on Obama...

What a fantastic read. I would add "Organize the World's News" to the list.

Access to credible, transparent and accurate news is a cornerstone of democracy, one that is lacking in many corners of the world. And IMO, News is not the same as information (so Google News doesn't count!). News is information and freedom coupled into one, and we need to ensure the world's masses have free information about the people, places and events that affect them.

Introducing that level of accountability and transparency into the news media industry is certainly a challenge, but the impacts are profound and widespread. Let's give it a go!

Your thoughts on the new bubbles are quite provocative and intensely probable as people continue their move to higher ground.

Who takes well to change?

I agree in that a radical change is necessary to sustain our growth and can see various elements falling out along the wayside in the turbulence, consumerism perhaps, being the most painful of them all with, org-chart rewrites a strong second place. The enterprise needs to be flexible and able to manage its assets efficiently, all of them.

We are as effective at communicating as the covenant we use, our dictionaries vary greatly. The problem is not only constructing this new DNA, but building a thought pattern as a delivery method. For this reason, I think the origin, will have to come out of the "lab", with a fully functional and viable model.

Sitting on the verge of a revolution, as it turns out happens to be a very interesting place to be and with my window to the world I can feel the excitement and uncertainty as we discuss our next course. Web 2.0 has given us something, that as a whole we've never had, the dream that anything is possible. It is in that statement that lies one of the greatest gifts humanity has ever received. Once we figure out the direction, the journey will be epic.

Who would of thought we could be so lucky?

This physical world of ours is much more then just money and if we continue to measure our lives by this method, we are doomed to fail. Quantifying other values is not an easy task, but one that must be tackled if we are interested in spending time in the future.

Regards and much thought from down south.
ef

You bring up many excellent points in your article. My contention in the book that I am writing called Content Nation is that the world has become a nation of publishers through social media - and that we are just beginning to understand as humans what it means to be a citizen of this nation. There will be prominent revolutionaries emerging in the months and years ahead, but already many have emerged - ignored by the mass media, but there nevertheless and accessible to those in Content Nation. I think of the uprising in Myanmar that was organized in large part through mobile phones. People ARE organizing for change. We need the help of large institutions to make these changes most effectively. But we can also begin to create more institutions that no longer rely upon established institutions to make those changes. Just as newspapers are trailing off into the history books so much the way that we do business trail off into new ways to organize for commerce. More on contentnation.com

If you want to save the world then join the Peace Corps, because you're not going to do it while sitting on your ass at the keyboard.

It takes hands-on effort to effect change. That means getting out among the people, even in your own community. Be a better neighbor, a better driver, a better citizen. It means doing things selfish people don't want to do.

It means getting your hands dirty, and dealing face-to-face with all those "icky" people you try to avoid when you're walking down the street with your ears plugged into your iWhatevers.

It means stepping outside the Web bubble and understanding that relatively few people in the world care about and use the Web, while those who do "just want to be entertained."

Bloggers are the online equivalent of "ladies who lunch"--a bunch of rich people chattering amongst themselves about how they're going to spend their afternoons.

Don't pretend you're going to make a difference building toy Web apps. People do this hoping to gain both money AND glory, and the ultimate arrogance of saying "Look at me--I got rich AND saved the world." It isn't noble--instead it's doubly selfish.

Say "good morning," smile and hold the door open for someone today, because that will change more lives than some Web app. The Golden Rule goes a long way.

Giddyup!

Love this - it's not a question of IF civilization will transform, it's only a question of how much 'discomfort' we will experience individually and societaly.

I've started calling this phase in our evolution The Great Remix (http://snurl.com/iggyremix) - and to me, what determines the trajectory is DNA and what determines the pace is our capacity to remix what is into what will be. That capacity is bolstered by technology and the efficiency and effectiveness with which we can leverage social and financial capital. There aren't any right answers, pathways, or endpoints in this but I really do believe you are agitating some of key communities (tech and fin cap).

Regardless of what any one person, group, or community does, we are going to transform, the only question(s) for anyone specifically is what's next? - what are you working on? - what are you doing as part of that? Are you agitating the frontiers or are you stuck in muck of the mainstream?

And Umair - you are certainly on your own path - and judging by the comments and discussions you should are mixing things up. :-) great stuff!

Dear Umair Haque,

your post is right and the solution plan exist since jun 2005. It's a New E-commerce Model and one key of the next 50 years. We are talking about 2 trillion dollars market solution and are looking for "angels investors" at www.silicow.com.

About the Google mission it's OK. You dont have to worry because The Next Search Paradigm answer all your questions and it's look like a Miracle Up Search. It's very simple and are under Patent Request and "Secret" Rank Technology. And are looking for "angels investors" too at www.silicow.com ... I try explain to Vint Cerf in fev. 02/2008 but i dont know if he "understand" my e-mail.:-)... Google like the ready solutions to see(prototype to evaluate, understand and incorporate)

If you dont believe me, please look my patent request more of 5 years before any similar "Google Earth" product (or Microsoft / Yahoo!) with International Search & Report by WIPO (© 2000) in this official link: http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/ia.jsp?ia=IB2001/000339
Feel free to contact me and ad me at your Linkedin Network
Please help me to find good investors!
Keep in touch!!!
CarlosLagemann.com
founder@silicow.com

Sounds almost like my portfolio:

Organize the world's hunger - McDonalds
Organize the world’s energy - Exxon
Organize the world’s thirst - Coca-Cola
Organize the world's health - Johnson & Johnson
Organize the world's freedom - Fruit of The Loom (Berkshire Hathaway subsidary)
Organize the world's finance - Goldman Sachs
Organize the world's education - Darwinism

Umair,

I started a thread on Hacker News. Maybe, world's best hackers and come up with something.

Also, I liked your idea of having an an open source list of world's problems and then a wiki for their solutions so that people may collaborate. Any takers for this idea?

This is a fantastic and long-overdue discussion. What many of these internet-specific questions really get to is what should be the larger purpose of software. What human values should software embody, and how should developers then integrate those values into code?

http://thenerfherder.blogspot.com/2008/06/web-debate-on-saving-world.html

Linked from the manifesto:

Organize the world's values/morality
Organize the world’s truth

The integral approach is an attempt to organise values/morality, truth, and much more besides. I have collated over 700 hundred diagrams from over 50 sources that use the integral approach in an ongoing project called Integral Diagrams, which cover the following realms of human endeavor and inquiry:

art
astrology
Christianity
city
community
consciousness
conspiracy theory
consulting
culture
ecology
economics
education
health care
ILP (integral life practice)
international development
law
leadership
magick
open space
peace
politics
psychaitry
psychology
psychotherapy
science
sex
social work
software development
sustainability
TSK (time space knowledge)

I have blogged about my vision for Integral Diagrams here and here.

Umair and distinguished readers,

It has been a while. Even though I have not been commenting actively,I've been listening very carefully. Not a day goes by that I don't think about your call to action ... to attack bigger problems.

Your kick in the pants combined with some realizations that came out of Pangea Day (www.pangeaday.org) have led me to something I think is worthwhile although it is mostly altruistic at this point (i.e. haven't thought about how this makes money).

I recently posted a blog about it so I won't go into too much detail here (see http://isfanstartup.blogspot.com/ ).

The brief synopsis is that I want to build a place that connects kids from all over the world to each other and the world they live in with video as the glue. Done successfully, this can lead to a society of people that see the world and the people in it as part of themselves. THEM=US. This leads to empathy and caring and ultimately to millions of shovels moving big mountains. We are solving one piece of the puzzle at favequest with the video platform we are building but ultimately need lots of help.

Come find me.

Allan Isfan
5628isfan@rogers.com
@isfan

We live in a world that we are capable to distribute and utilize unused bandwidth, data storage, processing and various forms of energy and at the same time we are unable to distribute our cooked food, vegetables and fruits to those that need it. We end up throwing our remaining food to garbages while families just few blocks from us are starving to death. It is outrageous.

Definitely Web can have a positive impact here. It is all about the distribution of information and small volunteer work.

We live in a world that we are capable to distribute and utilize unused bandwidth, data storage, processing and various forms of energy and at the same time we are unable to distribute our cooked food, vegetables and fruits to those that need it. We end up throwing our remaining food to garbages while families just few blocks away from us are starving to death. If you think about it a bit...it is outrageous.

Definitely WEB can have a positive impact here. It is all about the distribution of information and small volunteer work.

Umair, I am sorry but I just don't get your point- yes, we should pursue 'sustainable' development...but your ideas are far from being a solution to problems like world hunger; the invisible hand needs the freedom to grow food, create wealth and distribute wealth; we do not need to 'organize' world poverty or hunger, we need to eliminate them!

'Humanity' has that 'one-quality'...The line from Jeff Foxworthy (er, Jeff Goldblum / Dr. Ian Malcolm) in Jurrasic Park: "...so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should..."

God Forbid, surely 'history' (if nothing/anything else has taught us ...hasn't it?)...Just 'Because You Can, Should You?'...

With the world getting so populated and therefore so much 'dirtier'...I feel we owe it to both the planet and all of humanity to ask that question...regularly...

Umair, I do get your point and completely agree. By organizing we do eliminate the problems in our world such as world hunger. The problem lies in getting enough individuals to become interested, in taking the blinders off of the masses to allow each individual to contribute to the cause of working against such a problem, like Professor Yanus has.

Dan

accidental prophet? Umair, you are in danger of being mistaken for and misattributed for things you did not say- people are beginning to read too much in to what you say, projecting their own muddled wishful thinking on to yours...take care!

You seem to be saying that you wish to get rid of capitalism and install socialism. If the invisible hand doesn't do what you want, you and your closest colleagues and friends seem to wish to be on a committee to plan this for everyone else.

Your notion of all this "organizing" is pretty scary, however, as you are not elected, or even appointed.

Essentially, a lot of those problems in your "organization" list begin to be addressed realistically when you don't "organize" freedom but people organize themselves to fight for their freedom at a local and international level.

Hi Umair

Thought you might be interested in Heartlines. A social network driven by mass media and mobile phone based network aimed at national moral transformation by inspiring, supporting and connecting people to live by positive values.

I can send a summary if you would be interested.

Regards

Rob Taylor

How about a new top level domain which is dedicated to Umair's goals.

Every monetised click or transaction of .[ ] feeds a percent into an enviro/social fund, distributed by the users of the top level domain. More and more people are buying fairtrade, consuming with their heads and hearts and would use such a domain.

A debate has been started on facebook at the group "gtld - The Top Level Debate". Please join:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=18711156732

Thank you

Paul

ORGANIZE

Here's a good start at the small business level: http://www.ussourcelink.com/

Welcome to U.S.SourceLink!
SourceLink is a proven, cost-effective model that links a community's business development resources to each other - and to those that need them.
The SourceLink Model

Helps you identify your area's business development services
Organizes and makes these services easy to find
Supports all segments of your region's business - high-tech to retail, start-up to established
SourceLink was created by resource organizations for resource organizations.
The model builds strong linkages among the network of your business development resource organizations. It assists with:

Recognizing the resources your community needs
Building trust and collaborations among resources
Creating the network of resource organizations
Building a network across geographic boundaries
Identifying the positive effects of collaborations within the network
Before you attempt to grow your own, try SourceLink's fully-developed solution!

The Corporate Individual:
A New Way of Doing Business
By: Don Bailey
College of Charleston '11

I. Introduction
The modern capitalist economic structure is becoming out dated and very costly for human survival. It seems as though the means of earning capital are diminishing while the amount of people demanding access to the means are increasing. This is the most fundamental problem that economics seems fixated on correcting and manipulating. The law of supply and demand. This law has been the focus of most if not all of the praised economist for centuries. But the only shortfall of the cumulative success of our esteemed economist seems to be the huge burden of poverty. It seems inevitable in our system of capitalism that poverty is a necessary evil. While the game produces winners, it produces losers as well consequently resulting in a flawed system where participating requires an individual to gamble with their life. "If you lose, you die, if you indeed win, then your riches will allow you to be able to pursue the things in life that you enjoy." To put it frankly Win or Die. This is the game economics traps us in and this is the very same game that many have chosen death over.
The dark reality of economics only becomes clear when risk analysis is applied. Every situation in capitalism involves risky and not so risky behavior. There are certain amounts of risk in capitalism that cost millions to take but generate returns in the billions. This is a means of multiplying wealth. Why cant we simulate the same method on the individual bases and make it very inexpensive to create? Is it possible to create a method where every participant is a winner, because the risk to themselves remains minimal while the return value exponentially increases?
The reason why the rich get rich while the poor get poorer is because of the methods used to accumulate wealth. While those on the bottom tier of society have offered their services to industry for bottom pay at an hourly rate, those at the top demand pay for the job done while also requiring pay before completing the job. This order of life has been constructed through the division of the work life from the home life. By isolating and charging us for the things that we enjoy doing; and forcing us to participate in a game where it seemingly takes money to make it.
There is a solution. It is simple, and it allows us to become owners of our labor. Since labor produces product and it is the individual worker that contributes labor, then why not make labor a product to be owned as well? The structure of the new capitalist economy will be one in which every consumer is a producer.

II. Modern Economic Downfall

Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com senior writer, indicates that the economy is the number one issue for Americans. The latest reports on the economy indicate that consumer confidence is near an all time low, jobs continue to be outsourced leading to increasing numbers of unemployed citizens, gas prices are increasing, so the cost of travel is increasing as well. While the problems with the housing market seem to be over, the number of people who can now afford to buy new homes have diminished. As Americans we have experienced the most amount of job losses during a single recession than any other country. So why not make our means of collecting capital a zero risk investment?
Anne Fisher, Fortune senior writer explains,"With the ripple effect of the mortgage mess still spreading, consumer spending in a sulk, and companies like Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) and Sprint Nextel (S, Fortune 500) announcing big layoffs, you'd be smart to start thinking about recession-proofing your job - or, failing that - devising a plan for landing on your feet somewhere else."
The eight ways "to make you job recession proof" that Fisher suggest are as follows:

1. Think of ways to generate revenues or cut costs.
2. Be visible.
3. Talk up your contributions.
4. Keep a broad perspective.
5. Get your skills up to date.
6. No whining allowed.
7. Never stop networking.
8. Update your resume, return headhunters' phone calls, and start picturing where else you might like to work - just in case.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/30/news/economy/recession.proofing.fortune/index.htm
The problems with the economy seemingly make another economic catastrophe inevitable. The question for our generation that CNN.com has deemed "Issue #1" is the question of the economic well-being of each American. It is my pleasure to offer a solution to the problem that can (a.) work with the current structure, (b.) create new methods of gathering income, (c.) make millionaire status more accessible for more citizens, (d.) decrease the impact that recessions and depressions have on the individual, and (e.) make the transition from our present form of capitalism to more utopian economic structures easier.
III. The New Economic Structure
Amid the fear that the individual is declining alongside the fact that those with power are growing more and more powerful, there is a desire to reorder society and recreate the wealth. Since it would be seemingly unfair to just take the money of the rich and redistribute it to the lower classes, then why not create a social structure where individuals can only profit if their is some type of investment? Each form of participation in the new economy generates returns alongside of a new equilibrium. While supply and demand still controls tenants of the new economy, the producer/consumer dichotomy takes on an entirely new meaning. No longer can an individual be separated from their participation in the production of a good and be isolated to becoming simply a consumer.
The deconstruction of rights and the lowered standards of living are linked to economic activity. Media spectacles prove this true with high profile court cases involving the rich and famous. It seems as though the more money an individual has the less likely they are to receive sentencing for illicit activities. Moreover, even if they do receive some sort of sentencing, it seems as though they are advantaged in the system. This can be credited to the status of these individuals in relation to economic power and influence. This is to say that the economy is structurally interrelated with our justice department.
Hence the plan for a new economy that bridges the divide between the rich and the poor is simple. CONTRACTING SERVICES!
Before I explain what contracting services is, I would first like to venture to explain why we don't contract services now. John Locke explains that
"labor is the ultimate source of all economic value. (2nd Treatise §42) But the creation of a monetary system requires an agreement among distinct individuals on the artificial "value" frozen in what is, in itself, nothing more than a bit of "colored metal." This need for agreement, in turn, gives rise to the social order."
The resulting social order are the laws that govern economic activity, but as the laws cumulated on one another individuals have be separated from owning their own labor, instead those who pay for the services are perceived as the owners of the labor. This is merely perceptual ownership and is by no means correct. Individuals are the owners of their own actions and the new economic structure needs to realize that.
No individual can be the master of their destiny without first mastering themselves, but the modern economic structure prevents most from even creating a concept of the self.
Individuals own their actions, an individual and their actions are inseparable. This is the fundamental basis for the penal system, as well as insurance companies. Hence any job an individual has taken or done for the most part has been mis-conceptualized in the status quo. We are paid as employees and seemingly do work that is owned by others. For example, the service industry employee is paid by the hour to do work that belongs to a franchise or small business. The fundamental problem here is that the employee is merely a number to the company or a cost of production. The result in the scheme of maximizing profit is that the employee is no longer valued for the work they do, because they are a part of the companies equation for profit.
This is solved by making each individual an owner of their labor. The most successful business professionals gain money from investing, hence the dilemma that our economy is faced with is the lack of investment. The solution then is to make every monetary exchange an investment which is only accomplished through contracting services.
How do we contract our services then? Its simple, by corporatizing each individual. By doing this we accomplish a new social ordering where each individual is a potential investment to bring further profit. The genius of this system is that it is a continuous money multiplier.
The advantages to this system over the one that stands are numerous. Each expense is a tax write-off.
Each individual is a business owner, and there business succeeds to the extent that they invest time in it.
The money invested never comes back with diminishing returns.
The risk of depression can be mitigated because investment fuels innovation.
Competitive capitalism becomes a myth of the past while our generation moves towards cooperative capitalism.

Hi Umair,
At the end of your write up when i started reading the comments of so many friends from different corner of the world! i got more clarty of the theme. The growth is in DNA? true! and lets try to find what is behind the DNA.

Good day.
Ali Kapoor.

Umair,

Great ideas, but I have strong reservations about the large or global organisational approach. Organising things on a global or even country scale brings along with it a lot of additional burdens and costs for those involved - often it is conditional, even ideological. How does one achieve change in countries with poor transparency and very high levels of corruption - how do you deal with the clash of perceptions - by bringing in one whopper of a plan in which details to attention - so important are lost - hence the real failure of Marxist economic plans in Northern Africa and elsewhere. Let's talk straight. Black gold. Oil is the source of unbelievable wealth and misery in Africa - why is not enough done in that sector to free wealth - rather than as someone suggested to capitalise on untapped equity. Hunger in Africa is not to do with the ravages of nature or the poor agricultural skills of those there, it is to do with the distribution of wealth generated from oil and other commodities which is not being put into development of each country's infrastructure. You can organise as much as you want, but it needs something different - a dialogue with those who have power. Per capita many Africas are potentially richer than those in the US or Europe. So why aren't they? As to the questions of health. Again the big plan has the habit of becoming a juggernaut which does not allow for people to think properly. Anything that seems good becomes policy before you know it. Yet in science margerine is good for you one week, next week it is butter. The organisation has to be structured so as to be flexible enough and sensitive to react quickly, and at the same time put through programmes that will be of scientifically proven benefit. With environmental matters the UK is going ahead with 7000 wind turbines - but what of the maintenance costs - wear, turbine failure, environmental and ecological costs, and what of investing in better technology instead of the outdated prop? No, they go ahead, because like the danerous dog's act, it seemed good at the time. I have said many times over. Build human powered vehicles for inner cities (I have drawn up proposals for this) , use vortices in cities for power, plant more, change radically the diet...

But hey, its sports season. We watch the European football and Wimbledon as the North Pole melts away.

Organize the world's waste

Organize the world's debt

Organize the world's transportation

A friend from the conference sent me this link and asked what I thought. This was my response. posted here just FYI.
+++++
Read your article. The fundamental premise seems to be Communism. Sounds
grand to new young ears, fails in the real world. It says that if we plan
carefully and have a demand and control system with perfect information
everything will be OK and everybody will go along with it.

The premise is that everybody shares the information and acts rationally
when they have the information and everyone agrees on what to do when the
information is made available because the information is correct and true.
(Who gathers the information BTW?)

41% of Iran can't read. A million people can die in Africa from tribal
warfare at any time. Mexico exports millions of people to the US who do
not have education, health care or jobs there to have them send back $ to
Mexico. (Remitances are the 3rd largest income source for Mexico after oil
and exports.) The Thailand sex industry for pedofiles makes millions. The
implication of the article is that these people will be "managed" by the
information czars in some way and be made happy and productive somehow. To
be determined when the information is organized by the people who appoint
themselves to organize it and exercise the control. (Da, comrade!)

Information does not give people who can't read or have no job in their own
land a job to do and an income and wealth to accumulate unless somebody who
has those things chooses to give that to them out of their own pocket.

What will 9 billion people do for work, food, housing, and energy in 2125?
Work for Google in Silicon Valley, attend Supernova conferences and discuss
how Google will share the money they make with Nigeria because the
information plan says that is what should happen?

When you have food, energy, housing, and a high paying job it is terribly
easy to say that the whole world should have a job like yours and if they
did we would all hold hands and sing "coom-by-ya."

Fascinating is the future and what will happen. Horrible dangers and
intractable problems at every bend. Always human nature must be accounted
for: greed, hate, love, murder, war, kindness, compassion, irrational
choices, addiction, enterprise, religion, envy, lust, jealousy, ignorance,
hard work, laziness . . . -- all happening at the same time all around the
world.

I am not bashing the idea of a perfect world or of the need for new
industries and hope -- just that the industrial age and capitalism have
made the modern world and when you suggest that it can just be replaced
with sharing and information management that will not grow corn or pump
water for the swimming pool or build you a car to drive. Somebody has to
do work and build things to sell and make money with so they can have that
corn, water, and car -- because the whole world wants those things for
themselves and their children.

This is a very beautiful ideal.
The world leaders should read and learn a lot this piece.

JV posted

>> Information does not give people who can't read or have no job in their own land a job to do and an income and wealth to accumulate unless somebody who has those things chooses to give that to them out of their own pocket.

>> What will 9 billion people do for work, food, housing, and energy in 2125?

The reason these people can not read and have no job is due to either communist control or the results of empire or manipulation by the capitalist countries. Charity ("give that to them out of their own pocket") has only served to keep people dependent and served to keep the charity in business.

IMHO the answer lies in two things which are self-help and free/gift economics. The answer is not in Capitalism or Communism. The first thing that will encourage this is to provide education and knowledge at no cost for all the people of the world. This is already starting to happen due to the web. I think that other industries can also be made free in the future. People in developed countries can not develop the solutions for places that have no money, no electricity or other resources and corrupt governments. The answers must be developed by the few outstanding individuals in these societies.

It is easy to digitize and create free educational materials. There will be those geniuses in the future that are able to create systems for free medicine, transportation, manufacturing etc. These will be the leaders of the future and their economic system will not be either capitalist or communist but free and open source.

Prokofy Neva, there's a difference. what's being discussed are democratic institutions without central control, which is not what you describe. in fact, the structures we have in place at the moment are far more centralized and organizing. In addition, self-organizing means greater decentralization - and most importantly - direct-democracy

All of the above was said more accurately in "Post-Capitalist Society" by Peter Drucker back in '93.

Hmm. Both of these have been alluded to in the OP and subsequent comments, but no one stated them explicitly:

Organize the World's Shelter (or housing, if you prefer)

Organize the World's Manufacturing